Subhash Kumar Vs. State of Punjab

Subhash Kumar vs State of Punjab

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Mar 31, 2014

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1136273

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1136273
Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On: Mar 31, 2014
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Subhash Kumar

Respondent

State of Punjab

Excerpt

.........petitioner(s) versus state of punjab ....respondent(s) coram: hon'ble mr.justice m.m.s.bedi present mr.j.s.dadwal, advocate, for the petitioner in crm-m-25512-2012. mr.j.s.gill, advocate, for the petitioners in crm-m-27965-2012. mr.c.s.brar, dag., punjab. mr.shivoy dhir, advocate, for the complainant. m.m.s.bedi, j (oral).this order will dispose of the above noted two petitions i.e., one filed by subhash kumar and another filed by surjit singh and balvir kaur. the fir was registered at the instance of raj kumar arora 1 2014.04.02 10:51 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document crm-m-25512-2012 (o&m) sukhminder kaur alleging that her son surjit singh and petitioner subhash kumar had fraudulently obtained power of attorney and on the basis of said power of attorney transferred her property to balvir kaur petitioner no.2 and mother in law of subhash kumar. parties were given opportunity to amicably resolve the controvers.but no compromise seems to have been arrived at. state counsel on the instructions of the investigating officer informs that the challan has been presented during pendency of the present petitions. in the present case mother has been duped by her son to deprive the other children i.e., three unmarried sisters.the connivance of son with subhash kumar is apparent from the material gathered. no ground is made out to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail. the petitioners will not be entitled to any relief obtained by them during pendency of the petitions. these petitions are dismissed without prejudice to the rights of the parties to approach this court again in case any amicable settlement is arrived at between the parties. however, it will be open to the trial court to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioners.(m.m.s.bedi) march 31, 2014. judge rka raj kumar arora 2 2014.04.02 10:51 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Full Judgment

CRM-M-25512-2012 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on: March 31, 2014.

(1) CRM-M-25512-2012 (O&M).Subhash Kumar ....Petitioner(s) Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent(s) *** (2) CRM-M-27965-2012 (O&M).Surjit Singh and another ....Petitioner(s) Versus State of Punjab ....Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI PRESENT Mr.J.S.Dadwal, Advocate, for the petitioner in CRM-M-25512-2012.

Mr.J.S.Gill, Advocate, for the petitioners in CRM-M-27965-2012.

Mr.C.S.Brar, DAG., Punjab.

Mr.Shivoy Dhir, Advocate, for the complainant.

M.M.S.BEDI, J (ORAL).This order will dispose of the above noted two petitions i.e., one filed by Subhash Kumar and another filed by Surjit Singh and Balvir Kaur.

The FIR was registered at the instance of Raj Kumar Arora 1 2014.04.02 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-25512-2012 (O&M) Sukhminder Kaur alleging that her son Surjit Singh and petitioner Subhash Kumar had fraudulently obtained power of attorney and on the basis of said power of attorney transferred her property to Balvir Kaur petitioner No.2 and mother in law of Subhash Kumar.

Parties were given opportunity to amicably resolve the controveRs.but no compromise seems to have been arrived at.

State counsel on the instructions of the Investigating Officer informs that the challan has been presented during pendency of the present petitions.

In the present case mother has been duped by her son to deprive the other children i.e., three unmarried sisteRs.The connivance of son with Subhash Kumar is apparent from the material gathered.

No ground is made out to grant the concession of pre-arrest bail.

The petitioners will not be entitled to any relief obtained by them during pendency of the petitions.

These petitions are dismissed without prejudice to the rights of the parties to approach this Court again in case any amicable settlement is arrived at between the parties.

However, it will be open to the trial Court to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioneRs.(M.M.S.BEDI) March 31, 2014.

JUDGE rka Raj Kumar Arora 2 2014.04.02 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Same Court & Year Punjab and Haryana · 2014 Same Parties Subhash Kumar vs State of Punjab Same Subject Education